Verse 8.1 [Constitution of the Court of Justice]

Sanskrit text, Unicode transliteration and English translation by Ganganath Jha:

व्यवहारान् दिदृक्षुस्तु ब्राह्मणैः सह पार्थिवः ।
मन्त्रज्ञैर्मन्त्रिभिश्चैव विनीतः प्रविशेत् सभाम् ॥ १ ॥

vyavahārān didṛkṣustu brāhmaṇaiḥ saha pārthivaḥ |
mantrajñairmantribhiścaiva vinītaḥ praviśet sabhām || 1 ||

Desirous of investigating cases, the king shall enter the court, with a dignified demeanour, along with Brāhmaṇas and councillors, versed in counsel.—(1)

 

Medhātithi’s commentary (manubhāṣya):

It has been laid down that the protection of the people is a duty of the king; and this duty has been described in the following text: (a) ‘As a means of livelihood, to carry arms and weapons for the Kṣatriya, and to trade, to rear cattle and agriculture for the Vaiśya, and the serving of the twice-born for the Śūdra’—(10.79). The king who acts up to this attains unexcelled regions; and in this manner virtue prospers among the people.

Other castes also, who may be living the life of the Eṣattriya, are entitled to kingship:—‘Whoever happens to be the protector of the people is regarded as the king, Lord-Protector; and their duty has been ordained to consist in the good of the common people.’ By ‘protection’ here is meant the removal of troubles.

Troubles are of two kinds —seen and unseen. It is a case of ‘seen trouble’ when the weaker man is oppressed by the stronger, who takes away by force his belongings; and it is a case of ‘unseen trouble’ when the latter person suffers pain in the other world, through the sin accruing to him on account of his having transgressed the law (by taking what did not belong to himself). People very often act towards pne another in hatred, jealousy and so forth, and hence going by the wrong path, they become subject to ‘unseen’ evils; and thence follows the disruption of the kingdom; since it is only the prosperity of the people that is called ‘kingdom’; so that when the people are in trouble, where would the ‘kingdom’ lie?

It is for this reason that when cases are investigated and decided in strict accordance with the ordinances of scriptures, people, through fear, do not deviate from the right path; and hence they become protected against both kinds of trouble. Then again, in as much as for the king there is no other lawful moans of livelihood except the fines imposed upon criminals, and the taxes and duties, any obstacles in the proper administration and collection of those leads the kingdom into trouble.

From all this it follows that for the sake of preserving the kingdom, the investigation of cases is necessary, and it is this that is now described.

The term ‘vyavahāra,’ ‘case,’ is the name given to that action of the plaintiff and the defendant which they have recourse to for the purpose of reclaiming their rights. Or, it may stand for the non-payment of debts and such other matters themselves, which often become the subjects of dispute and as such fit for investigation, which thus becomes the duty of the king.

The term ‘desirous of investigating’ is to be construed with ‘shall investigate the suits’ (of the next verse) and the said ‘points of dispute’ are referred to in detail again (in verse 4)—‘Of these, the first is non-payment of debts, etc.’; the construction being that ‘he shall investigate all these matters.’

The ‘court’ is that place which is presided over by the officer going to be described below;—‘entering’ means going into the place.

The question arising as to whether or not the king shall enter the Court, alone, unattended, the text adds—‘along with Brāhmaṇas.’

Question.—“What does the adjective ‘versed in counsel’ qualify? It cannot qualify the ‘councillors’; as the said qualification is implied by the very name ‘councillor,’ for one who does not know the art of counselling can never be called a ‘councillor.’ Nor can it qualify the ‘Brāhmaṇas’; because since they are entrusted with the work of investigating cases, the knowledge of counsel (if prescribed) could be prescribed only for some transcendental purpose.”

To the above we offer the following reply: The qualification is of the ‘Brāhmaṇas’; if they were ignorant of counsel, they would arrive at random and wrong conclusions, and thereby bring trouble to the King, for instance, if a certain ordinary person were to file a suit against some one connected with the Chief Minister,—and the latter happens to lose the case,—then, if he were not fined, or if he were not forced to pay up the fine, the administration of justice would not be impartial; and the people would come to the conclusion that the King is cither partial or too weak-minded;—on the other hand, if the man were fined, this would displease the Chief Minister, and that also would lead to trouble among the people. In such cases, if the investigating officers happen to be ‘versed in counsel,’ then, whenever they are in any such suspense, they postpone the proceedings of the case, under some pretext, and advise the King in private, to the following effect—‘You please do something yourself, whereby the man may be made to compromise between these two parties,—this party loses and that party wins the case,—but the case has not been disposed of by us; the decision now rests with your Majesty.’ Thereupon, the King, having come to know the facts of the case, orders the Chief Minister to the following effect—‘Your man is going to lose his case,—but for the present the decision has been postponed, in order that your prestige may not suffer; it is for you to do something whereby the other party may be appeased and his grievance removed.’ Upon this the Minister, whose advice is accepted by all men, takes steps to stop the evil propensities of all men.

Others hold that, just as the single eye of the crow operates in both sockets, so the epithet ‘versed in counsel’ is applicable to both, ‘Brāhmaṇas’ and ‘councillors,’ but in different senses: when qualifying the ‘councillors,’ being ‘versed in counsel’ connotes the knowledge of the details of the cases; and when qualifying the ‘Brāhmaṇas,’ it connotes impartiality.

The Brāhmaṇas and the Councillors are not to enter only; but they are to help, in the best manner they can, in the ‘investigating of suits’ (spoken of below). If this were not meant, then their ‘entering’ could only be intended to serve some transcendental purpose. Thus the sense is that the King shall not decide cases by himself alone, but in consultation with the councillors and Brāhmaṇas.

‘With a dignified demeanour’;—i.e., free from fickleness of speech, hand and feet. If he were fickle, there would be trouble.

The use of the term ‘pārthiva,’ ‘king,’ implies that the teaching here addressed is meant not only for one who is Kṣatriya by caste, but for others also, who may happen to be owners of land and a kingdom. Because unless he dues what is here laid down his sovereignty does not become duly established.—(1)

 

Explanatory notes by Ganganath Jha

This verse is quoted in Aparārka (p. 600), which explains ‘mantrajñaḥ’ as ‘arthaśāstrajñaḥ’, ‘learned in the Science of Polity’, and deduces the sense that the person who tries cases should act up to the principles of the Science of Polity, in so far as they are not incompatible with the Dharmaśāstra, the Ethical Science.

It is quoted in Parāśaramādhava (Vyavahāra, p. 18), to the effect that having entered the court, the king shall carry on the work, in association with learned men and with councillors;—in Vyavahāramayūkha (page 2) in Nṛsiṃhaprasāda (Vyavahāra, p. 1b):—in Kṛtyakalpataru (3a), which has. the following notes—‘Vyavahārān’, points of dispute between the plaintiff and the defendant,—‘didṛkṣuḥ’, with a view to determine,—‘pṛthivīpatiḥ,’ includes non-Kṣatriyas also,—‘mantrajñaiḥ’, persons conversant with the method of doing business in due accordance with the exigencies of time and place,—this qualifies ‘brāhmaṇaiḥ’, ignorant Brāhmaṇas being prone to give hasty advice and thereby create trouble,—‘mantribhiḥ’ stands for experienced councillors;—and in Vīramitrodaya (Vyavahāra, p. 4a).

 

Comparative notes by various authors

(verses 8.1-2)

Gautama (13.26).—‘The king or the judge ora Brāhmaṇa learned in the scriptures shall examine the witnesses.’

Vaśiṣṭha (16.2).—‘Let the king or the minister transact the business on the bench.’

Viṣṇu (3.72).—‘Let the king try causes himself, accompanied by well-instructed Brāhmaṇas.’

Do. (71.60).—‘Near the Fire, Deities and Brāhmaṇas, he shall raise the right arm.’

Yājñavalkya (1.359).—‘Every day, he shall look into cases himself, surrounded by members of the Assembly.’

Do. (2.1).—‘The king shall try causes, accompanied by learned Brāhmaṇas, in strict accordance with legal scriptures,—being free from anger and avarice.’

Yama (Aparārka, p. 596).—‘The king, assisted by the minister, free from all love and hatred, shall carefully look into the causes of contending parties.’

Nārada (Do. p. 599).—‘The king composedly looking into cases himself obtains bright fame here and reaches the regions of Indra.’

Śukranīti (4.5.7, 9-13).—‘Vyavahāra i s that which, by discriminating the good from the evil, ministers to the virtues of both the people and the king, and furthers their interests. The king should attentively look after law-suits, freeing himself from anger and greed, according to the dictates of the legal scriptures,—in the company of the Judge, the Minister, the Brāhmaṇa and the Priest. He should never singly try cases of two parties, or hear their statement. Neither the wise king nor the Councillors are to hold a trial in secret.’

Śukranīti (4.5.85).—‘The King should enter the court modestly, together with the Brāhmaṇas and the Ministers versed in state-craft,—with the object of investigating cases.’

Kātyāyana (Smṛticandrikā-Vyavahāra).—‘The King shall be accompanied by those permanent members who are experienced, having hereditary connections, the best of the twice-born, expert in the sacred law and in the science of polity.’

Kātyāyaṇa (Parāśaramādhava--Vyavahāra, p. 17).—‘That place is called Dharmādhikaraṇa, Court, where the truth regarding suits is investigated in pursuance of the legal scriptures.—The king shall enter the court after having finished all his daily duties, and after having duly honoured, with flowers and ornaments, his preceptor, astrologers, physicians, deities, Brāhmaṇas and Priests.’

Do. (Vīramitrodaya-Vyavahāra, p. 14).—‘If the King looks into lawsuits, with the assistance of the Judge, the Minister, the Brāhmaṇa and the Priest, he attains heaven.’

Do. (Vyavahāratattva, p. 2).—‘Accompanied by the Judge, the Minister, the Brāhmaṇa and Priest, the King himself shall determine their victory or defeat.’

Bṛhaspati (1.4-5).—‘The king, his chosen representative Judge, other Judges, the Law, the Accountant and the Scribe, Gold, Fire, Water, and the Bailiff are the ten components of the Court; in which the King examines causes with due attention.’

Do. (1.20 et. seq.).—‘Let the King try causes, attended by these Judges, after having entered the Court, in a sitting or standing posture. Having risen early in the morning and performed ablutions according to rule, and having honoured the elders, astrologers, physicians, deities, Brāhmaṇas and domestic priests.’

Do. (27.25).—‘Let the King every day examine in common with learned Brāhmaṇas, the suits preferred by litigants, as also those instituted by the King himself.’